|
Elder Abuse - Introduction
Abuse of older people has become endemic - it manifests to a greater or lesser degree in people of a certain class or living in a particular location. Elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation has now reached substantial proportions.
Although family members form a majority of abusers the problem crosses all geographic, socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic groups. Administrators frequently insinuate themselves as surrogate parents into the lifestyles of elders on the unwarranted assumption that they cannot look after themselves.
Elder abuse includes: physical assault (force that results in physical pain or injury); humiliation (threats, harassment, and intimidation); neglect (confinement or restraint either intentionally or unintentionally); and, financial exploitation (misuse or withholding resources for personal advantage). The abuse very often bases upon financial exploitation although more than one type of abuse may occur in any given circumstance. Financial exploitation and emotional abuse rank as the most commonly reported.
Typically, victims of elder abuse classify as widowed, white females over 62 years of age living on a limited income. They usually live with, or under the auspices of, the perpetrator. Elder victims often do not report the abuse. They fear retaliation by the abuser, personal shame for their situation, or worry about having to leave their home. Consequently, they do not make reports.
The abuser usually depends on his victims for housing, financial assistance, emotional support, or employment. Symptoms inherent in many abusers: verbal and physical assault (threats and insults); financial misappropriation (concern with financial situations instead of health or well-being); freedom of expression; (removing constitutional rights of freedom of speech); projection (blaming elders for their own shortcomings or emotional immaturity); histrionics (indifference and anger); and, punishment (ostracism, unlawful eviction, and incarceration). [01] [Histrionics and Narcissism]
King County, Washington, defines vulnerable adults as people over the age of 60 who lack financial, physical, or mental ability to care for themselves. This includes people with developmental disability who have a legal guardian. Adults living in long-term care facilities or receiving services from an agency or contracted individual provider also classify as vulnerable adults. [Vulnerable Adults] [02]
Council House tenants do not come under a vulnerability mandate although administrators would have the public believe that they do. Those who legally live there possess all their faculties and have the ability to act independently. They rent apartments in an apartment block as tenants in the same manner as anyone else governed by landlord/tenant laws. The difference from other landlord/tenant relationships relates only to economic disadvantage and age.
The directors, who wish to remain anonymous, run a profitable non-profit corporation as benevolent dictators. The administrator classifies as a landlord not a nursing home supervisor or mental health counselor renting beds to crazy old people (as he and his associates frequently describe them). The apartments that he has rented to vulnerable people contravene HUD regulations. This has caused much of the problem especially as he uses them as Kapos to spy upon tenants, harass and assault them, including death threats. [Five Kapos]
An all-Jewish board with more than twenty past and present directors; neo-fascist, non-Jewish, managers; five thugs (Kapos); and, a thirty percent Jewish tenant elite terrorize the remaining tenants. As an entity, Council House denies basic human and civil rights to tenants who descend from a variety of national, ethnic, and religious backgrounds. That constitutes elder abuse.
In the past, Nazi politically correct policies mandated that Jews and queers could do no right. They labeled them by making them wear either yellow or pink Magen David emblems. In contrast, Council House managers and directors follow an equally atrocious notion that Jews and queers can do no wrong. Hitler conducted a policy of overt extermination by massacre. Council House directors and managers follow similar totalitarian policies in an abusive campaign based upon covert extinction of dissenters through unlawful eviction and attrition.
History has shown that tyranny starts with one unlawful imprisonment and massacre starts with a single death. Yet that maxim has no effect at Council House where hostility toward other groups, mainly economically deprived Jews and religious or racial dissenters, continues on a daily basis through implementation of zero-tolerance policies.
A Jewish tenant compared those policies with Endlösung (the final solution). Stephen (aka Stefan) A. Mitchell, administrator, “disposed of him” by unlawful eviction. He has also silenced others by eviction or incarceration. Council House begs comparison with Abu Ghraib prison and the similar attitude of American soldiers and mercenaries toward Iraqi prisoners. [Lest we Forget]
Council House board of directors consists of lawyers, a medical doctor, accountants, and other professional people. They have infiltrated all the lucrative walks of life and have members of the judiciary in their pocket.
Judge James A. Doerty, a queer judge, has implicated the gay community by outing himself then using it for political purposes. Governor Locke appointed him to the superior court (a decision apparently based upon sexual proclivity) something the judge could never have achieved on his knowledge of law or his ethics. [Queer Connection]
Council House directors principally stem from either Herzl-Ner Tamid or Temple de Hirsch Sinai synagogues. Using totalitarian philosophy, predicated upon personal financial gain vested in a non-profit corporation, they act as benevolent dictators to cover up misappropriation of taxpayer money and elder abuse. [Hornet Nests]
Contempt for Law
Washington law requires that any person who complains to any branch or agency of federal, state, or local government, about organizations subject to agency oversight remains immune from civil liability. That law grants immunity to journalists and protects them from liability for reporting elder abuse. It should also protect them from retaliation for performing that civic duty. [RCW 4.24.510]
HUD and CoS officials received details of Council House abuse over several years without responding. Every branch of government at every level within the United States must by law as well as by policy, commit to the protection of individual life, liberty and physical integrity. Each official must insure prompt and thorough investigation when they receive allegations of mistreatment and abuse. They must punish those who have committed violations and institute reforms to prevent a recurrence. [03]
The following incident shows a complete disregard for that premise. A former tenant visited HUD to explain the circumstances. After he traveled for two hours, Clarence Nelson, a HUD official (although sitting in his office at the time he arrived) kept him waiting for twenty-four hours before speaking to him. He had to stay in a motel overnight. He then spent one hour treating the tenant with disdain and insolence and did nothing about the complaint.
In response to a public records request for the minutes of that meeting Nelson sent a blank piece of paper. Both agencies cooperated with Council House instead of taking action in the tenant’s behalf. This allowed the directors to evict and jail him in retaliation for reporting their dereliction and publishing details of their abuse. [Silent Withholding]
Instead of granting protection guaranteed under the law, Judge Doerty granted immunity to the perpetrators of the crimes that he exposed. He brought the judiciary into disrepute by denying due process of law and exempted Council House directors from their legal duties, penalties, and liabilities. He effectively granted them immunity from prosecution. [Impunity]
Doerty’s judicial misconduct encouraged the directors to file false reports with government agencies that the journalist had committed crimes in attempts to discredit his reporting and cover up their crimes. Apart from elder abuse and homicide, probably the most serious offenses committed by directors relate to the false reports that they filed with agencies and perjury that they filed with the court. [Judicial Misconduct and the Law]
The blame for Council House elder abuse brought about by corruption and dereliction rests fairly and squarely with the directors. The directors have aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, or procured the commission of elder abuse. That makes them principals, ultimately punishable, despite not performing the act themselves.
Any amount of judge-shopping, whether at the superior or appellate court levels cannot grant them impunity. They have employed people with criminal propensity and low moral standards without training, educating, or supervising them. Then, with religious fervor and a thirst for vengeance, they condoned consequent elder abuse.
The directors cannot use ignorance of the law as an excuse and their tame judges can only interpret law not make it. In a final analysis, judges must not delay and deny justice to suit their political, ethnic, or religious alliances. In the Council House case that complicity evidences in a reading of the court of appeals opinion. [Court of Appeals - Opinion]
Unfortunately, judges have immunity from prosecution for crimes that they send ordinary people to jail for committing. That allows the unethical and immoral among them to act unlawfully with impunity. The public can only punish them by bringing judicial misconduct charges and not voting for their reelection. [Judicial Misconduct and the Law]
The chief judge of the court of appeals hopes to gain promotion to the supreme court. However, she has allegedly aided and abetted elder abuse. She has echoed the trail court findings by knowingly repeating perjured and suborned testimony not subjected to cross-examination. That ranks as a deliberate attempt to pervert justice which under judicial canons classifies as misconduct.
The directors continue their indifference to resident abuse and misappropriation of funds despite public exposure. However, people who accept public money have no right to privacy. They remain subject to review despite judges who grant them immunity. However, one must admire their business acumen, they apparently now own three superior court judges - James A. Doerty, Michael C. Hayden, and Anthony P. Wartnik - all with a guilty until proven innocent mentality. It seems that appellate judges Mary Kay Becker, Marlin J. Appelwick, and Ann Schindler, have now joined the club.
Recapitulation
The police believe Mitchell when he tells them that he has authority and mental health degrees that he does not possess. He tells police that he has diagnosed tenants as violent mental cases and a danger to other tenants after scripting fictitious scenarios. As a result, several tenants that he has had incarcerated went to public mental institutions without prior examination by a qualified psychiatrist or mental health practitioner. [Thespian Liar]
Council House directors, HUD, and several courts, have turned a blind eye to Mitchell's supremacist tactics and abuse of tenants. This results from Council House not appointing a qualified administrator or service coordinator. Judge Maureen A. Howard considered the Council House administrative problems in Lambert v. Harris a matter for the directors to resolve not the courts. Clergy and other tenants have said the same thing. Mitchell has actively provoked situations that cause disputes among tenants during the time that he has worked at Council House and continues to do so with court-sanctioned impunity. [Trials of Leon Harris]
The directors have authorized Mitchell to commence legal action including, but not limited to, eviction proceedings and antiharassment petitions at will. This evidently distances them from his bizarre strategies. Those authorizations coupled with Doerty’s draconian findings and a travesty of an appellate opinion allow him to continue to act unlawfully and unilaterally. The directors have also allowed him to employ lawyers to set tenants against each other. He uses that power, in his sole discretion, to silence dissent.
Virtually unlimited funds now allow him arbitrarily to declare open season on people with whom he disagrees and to announce and establish "zero tolerance" policies. The trial court has granted this absolute power despite HUD regulations that provide specific procedures to deal with resident problems and complaints.
Court orders allow Mitchell to call police about tenants who have refused to tolerate abuse. They allow him to commit elderly tenants for psychiatric evaluation without probable cause. He uses that power to punish them for standing up to him. He tried to have this writer committed to an asylum when he would not stop reporting his behavior to authorities. He later settled for unlawful incarceration after boasting for almost a year that he would jail him. [Court-Facilitated Terror]
Understandably, Council House directors do not want to act because they have much to hide themselves, particularly, misappropriation of government funds and acquiescence to long-term tenant abuse. They may calculate that spending $100,000 to cover up crimes seems modest in relation to the large amounts misappropriated and $30/40 million in equity that they can either liquidate or convert in 2012 without having invested a penny.
Their policy becomes evident when one considers that they could easily obtain eviction orders if they had probable cause. An unlawful detainer action would cost them about $1,000/$2,500 in attorney fees and court costs instead of their current expenditure on legal fees and the enormous contingent liabilities that they have accrued.
City of Seattle attorneys ignored complaints, accepted false reports filed by Council House, then neglected to process them according to law. They then withheld documents subject to public disclosure in a cover up of that complicity. HUD followed a similar pattern or practice then participated in a campaign to silence the author by employing kill-the-messenger techniques. Reports on this and related issues appear in other sections of this web site. [Contents and Abstracts]
Conclusion
Judge Doerty participated in an organized campaign to character assassinate and vilify a litigant by knowingly entering false and perjured testimony into the court record then he suppressed other evidence. He collaborated in propaganda techniques similar to those fashioned by Joseph Goebbels. He made decisions reminiscent of those made by judges in Nazi Germany despite immunity granted under Washington state law to people reporting crimes. [Silent Withholding]
Council House staff used court findings to tighten their unconstitutional hold over tenants by pointing to Doerty’s decisions as an example of what could happen to them. Then Stephen Mitchell and Felippe Jacques both used locked bulletin boards to post disinformation and censor facts to support that intimidation - shades of Joseph Goebbels.
Three years later, the Kafkaesque Council House charade continues unabated by the directors, unchallenged by HUD or CoS, and condoned by judges. That an all-Jewish board of directors should allow supremacists like Mitchell and his staff to continue behavior reminiscent of Nazi Germany strikes a democratic person as truly oxymoronic. However, the directors may gain succor from the current national trend.
The authorities need to stop Mitchell and his directors before more tenants die as a result of neglect and homicide. Mandated anonymity to hide alleged misuse of government funds, abuse, and homicide, must cease.
Representatives Dunn and McDermott, also Senator Murray, have known about the abuse for years but have done nothing to investigate allegations. They have only written platitudinous letters. McDermott’s mother, Roseanna (94), lives at Council House. A member of an elite group, she filed a complaint based upon constitutionally protected writing. The reporter never met this woman or interviewed her yet she complained that he harassed her and has committed perjury to that effect. Perhaps the apple does not fall far from the tree.
Council House directors and administrators knowingly violated the free-speech rights of a veteran journalist who reported misconduct. They also violated the civil and human rights of many of their tenants. Reporters write about corruption, wrongdoing, misconduct, wastefulness, or inefficiency by government employees, including law enforcement officers. Their speech, inherently a matter of public interest, remains constitutionally protected. Reporting wrongdoing on the internet ranks no less deserving of First Amendment protection than using other news media to report similar information. [List of names and addresses of Council House directors]
Directors and administrators of government financially-assisted housing and non-profit corporations must submit to review. HUD, King County, and City of Seattle, have no legitimate interest in covering up mismanagement or corruption and cannot justify retaliation against reporters as a means of avoiding embarrassment that may result from exposure. [HUD-Seattle and Bremerton Contract Administrator]
Will Council House directors continue to use their judicial and political connections to cover up egregious elder abuse?
- Probably, the court of appeals has effectively sanctioned a continuation of elder abuse and the directors have millions of dollars at stake.
Why would a court grant directors of a non-profit organization anonymity to indulge in elder abuse with impunity?
- To protect their toadies in the hope of election campaign contributions.
Why do government agencies deny reporters their right of access to public information?
- They fear exposure of their dereliction.
Contra Cabal describes what happens when incompetent, corrupt government officials and irresponsible judges acquiesce to ignorance and bigotry. Publication of the first report in this series occurred almost four years ago but the court, on motions by Council House, silenced the author using prior restraint. Despite those orders he will continue to publish more case studies on a regular basis in the public interest. [Elder Abuse - Abstracts]
[Nmesis]
|
